الفهرس | Only 14 pages are availabe for public view |
Abstract Intensie production sy tern mflicrcou iderable tre on. poultry, adv rs ly aff cting lit co t of production, he use of dietary additive. uch a probioric i gaining momentum becau e oftheir beneficial effe r 011 gr wrb Utile and food efficiency (Dilwol”t’ll and Day 1978)’~~andof their prevention of inre tinal infection [Fulfer, J992t~. TIle use of probi tic t promote health and nurriuon /18 been attracting a great deal of attention for a long time (Gillilalld, 1990)11, Increased publi concern over the de elopment and pread of antibiotic re i tance in acteria lind the p . ible pres en e of antibiotic re iduals ill poultr product have led to earch for alternative to 11 e f antibiotic ill chicken diet ( oag et. III 20’2)’~, Currently, 111.<”111 partsof the world lire experimenting alternative feed additiv es that may be \1 ed to alleviate the problems a ociatedwith the withdrawal of antibiotic from feed. popular alternative to the use of antibiotic ha been the iu e of probiotic.\. hich j 11 ed in poultry for ”competitive exclu ion” of bacterial pathogens (Barrow, 1992)’ , he term probiotic originated from the Greek and means ”in favor of life”. while if antonyms 1 antibiotic which means against life (Copporla and Tames, 2004t~. Also probiotic are defined as live mi: roorgani msadmiuisrrated in. adequate amount 10 perform a beneficial heahh effect n (he hosn Scbivel’a, 2004)11i6. In chickens. Salmonella, Echerichia coli lind ’ampylobacter. are the main pathogenic microorgani 111S that colonize the intestinal traer, The infection doe not cause eriou illness in bird. and production losses lire not normally very important, However, Salmonella infected chickens repre enr a ourc of pathogens for humans CRU ing severe illne S and Thi s is trial version. |